Never-ending Mazda troll

This ad is a little old, but Mazda is still running ads in the same style, so we may as well revisit it.



Realistically, I don't know what I should have expected from the people who brought us this complete mess, but man, this is some seriously self-absorbed shit right here, isn't it?

Announcer: "They called his inventions novelties, even risky. But when Thomas Edison threw the switch, it changed everything."

I'd like to know who "they" are supposed to be, but whatever. Mazda - an utterly unremarkable car company in most respects - is comparing itself to someone broadly considered to be the greatest inventor of the modern age. And they're not being ironic. All these ads talk about someone changing their field, or even the world, with a remarkable new invention. And that's like Mazda, apparently.

Announcer: "Courage. Creativity. Conviction."

Courage. Courage! Just let that sink in for a second. Mazda is sucking its own dick about how brave it is as a car company. The courage to create... a CUV! The exact same fucking model that every car company has been putting out over the last five years. Give these guys the fucking Medal of Honor, because they are just so courageous.

Announcer: "SkyActiv technology makes the Mazda CX-5 lighter yet stronger, earning a top safety pick."

Well, that's very... creative? What the fuck is SkyActiv technology? There's a brief graphic on the screen which, if you freeze it, appears to be talking about the engine - "13.0:1 compression ratio," "advanced direct injection" - which may be great, but does that actually have anything to do with safety? You'd think this is the spot where you should be talking about crumple zones or what have you.

Announcer: "And more fuel-efficient than any hybrid SUV, without compromising performance."

Think about the sheer balls-out conviction it must have taken to decide that people might like their cars to be more fuel-efficient.

Announcer: "This is the Mazda way."

At this point I just picture Mazda like Mark Wahlberg in the last scene of Boogie Nights. That's right, Mazda. You're a star. You're a bright shining star.



That's a more recent spot, and guess what? Same shit. For a company that spends so much time touting its own boldness, Mazda has no problem whatsoever trotting out the exact same spot a year later, only with the inventor of the digital camera subbed in. What's particularly ridiculous here is that (a) it's clearly not the case that the camera was "virtually unchanged" between 1900 and the invention of the digital camera and (b) once again Mazda is comparing "making a slightly more fuel-efficient crossover SUV" to a massive technological leap. Uh, it's not. The CX-5 does get pretty good reviews, but there are a lot of compact SUVs and crossovers out there and at least a couple others also do well with the critics. Don't act like nobody else makes anything remotely like your product when literally everyone does. Is it the best model in its class? I mean, it might be, right? But if so, tell me why! And I mean, tell me why legitimately, without making flowery comparisons to invention pioneers or dropping impenetrable jargon like "SkyActiv technology," which almost no one watching this ad knows anything about. (It sounds cool, though, right? Better get a Mazda to get you some of that sweet, sweet SkyActiv technology, whatever it is!)

Do us all a favor, Mazda - stop acting like you fucking invented cars. If you want to sell me a car, tell me a few things about your car. Don't jerk yourselves off on television and call that an ad. I'm not saying this ad doesn't say anything about the car - we at least hear about the fuel efficiency and something vague about a safety award - but I get so turned off by the bullshit comparisons that I've tuned out before you even start talking about the CX-5 itself. Can't you guys just make a normal ad for once?

I'm Insulting The Viewer Rob Lowe, and I have DirecTV

I expect that most of the issues with the Rob Lowe DirecTV campaign have been hashed out in various places over the last few months, but I don't think we could start posting here again and not talk about these ads.



That's the first in a series that has now extended to seven different spots, which is some Geico-level shit.

Rob Lowe: "Hi. I'm Rob Lowe, and I have DirecTV."
Super Creepy Rob Lowe: "And I'm Super Creepy Rob Lowe, and I have cable."

Right from the outset, this is kind of a weird pitch. Because... what is the pitch? People who have cable are creeps? Someone who is creepy definitely would have cable?

RL: "With DirecTV, you get 99% signal reliability."

The fine print here says "Based on a nationwide study of representative cities." Which seems kind of vague and evasive, but I don't know. Maybe it's true.

RL: "Now that's reliable."

Thanks for interpreting that figure for me. As the kind of creep who has cable, I'm far too busy taking upskirt photos to do math.

SCRL: "My cable's out, so I'm down at the rec center, watching folks swim."

Wow, I guess cable must be terrible. Oh, wait, this part of the ad is based on absolutely nothing. I mean, is there some figure you could be quoting about how cable is out way more of the time? As it stands, it could easily be the case that cable's signal reliability is actually 99.9%. I always get suspicious when advertisers hide figures like this. Why doesn't DirecTV want to talk numbers all of a sudden? Doesn't matter, right? The guy with cable is a creep! That's the important point. I guess.

RL: "I love that I can watch my shows and be worry-free."

Couldn't even squeeze in a second actual claim, huh?

SCRL: "And I love the smell of other people's hair!"

Well, I guess they had to set up that "I love" parallel somehow. Had to.

RL: "Don't be like this me. Get rid of cable and upgrade to DirecTV."

Of course, there are a lot of ways not to be like "Super Creepy Rob Lowe." Having cable would be about nine thousandth in terms of importance on the list of "Things that this fake person does that you should really not do." But implicitly insulting your potential customers for their current purchasing habits is always a really good way to move product. Like, if you were walking into a McDonald's, and some guy in a Burger King uniform started yelling at you from the sidewalk that you should eat at Burger King because only jerks and losers eat at McDonald's... is your next move to go to Burger King? I will answer that for you: it is not. (Side note: I would not have put it past Crispin Porter + Bogusky to try that when they were in charge of BK's marketing campaigns.)

So anyway, either this ad was somehow "popular" or DirecTV already had a bunch in the pipeline, because then they brought out several more. The second one was... problematic. Okay, more problematic.



It's funny, because he has terrible social anxiety! Oh wait, that's not really funny at all. That's a diagnosable psychiatric condition.

RL: "DirecTV is number one in customer satisfaction over all cable TV providers."

Okay, actual claim. Not bad so far?

PARL: "With cable, you wait forever for them to show up! I hope it's not a girl."

"And I'm Super-Lazy-Joke-Making Rob Lowe. I have cable."

PARL: "...or a guy."

Social Anxiety Disorder, per the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association: "A persistent fear of one or more social or performance situations in which the person is exposed to unfamiliar people or to possible scrutiny by others. ... The feared situations are avoided or else are endured with intense anxiety and distress." Sounds like a laff riot! Suck it up and get DirecTV, you pussy!

RL: "Fact: DirecTV has been ranked higher than cable for over ten years."
PARL: "Fact: I can't go with other people in the room."

Paruresis. A relatively common phobia. Also, a PHOBIA. Like, a legit psychological issue. Not just something that only happens to weird fey losers like Painfully Awkward and Probably Not Coincidentally Kind of Effeminate Rob Lowe.

Anyway, it goes on like this. The remaining list of Fake Alternate Rob Lowes not to be like: Crazy Hairy Rob Lowe, Scrawny Arms Rob Lowe, Meathead Rob Lowe (so apparently you suck if you have no muscle but also if you have too MUCH muscle?), Overly Paranoid Rob Lowe, and Peaked in High School Rob Lowe. Laugh-a-minute jokefests all.

So let's try and figure it out. What is the pitch? What is it? If we take it seriously, the pitch is, "These weirdos have cable. Which means everyone who has cable is a weirdo! Do you wanna be a weirdo? No? Then you'd better get DirecTV, weirdo!" If it's more of a joke, then all you really have is DirecTV going, "We're better than cable! Also, have a look at these at best mildly amusing alternate Rob Lowes we came up with to tell you that."

You know what these ads remind me of? Apple's "I'm a Mac" ads. There are quite a few similarities: you've got one company treating a bunch of different companies as a single monolithic entity ("cable" means different things depending on where you live, much like how there are various manufacturers who produce "PCs"); you have the company not just claiming to be better than its competition but also depicting that competition in the form of someone intended to be less appealing; you have usually pretty vague descriptions of what the differences actually are; and, of course, you have the advertising company with a substantially smaller percentage of the market share.

I understand that whoever's behind tends to feel the need to go on the attack. It's why Pepsi goes after Coke but not the other way around; it's why Taco Bell couldn't just say "Hey, we've got breakfast food now," but felt the need to go after McDonald's in the process; it's why the political races in which the most mud-slinging goes on are the close ones. It makes sense in principle - if most people are going with your competitor already, you feel like you can't just say "Here's what I've got." You have to say "Here's what I've got and HERE'S WHY IT'S BETTER. You should change what you're doing." Again, in principle, this works. In practice, however, it comes off as insulting far too often. Taco Bell's ad attempts to suggest that Egg McMuffins are old and tired. But if you're the sort of person who eats Egg McMuffins all the time, it's probably because you like Egg McMuffins. And hey, maybe you're not going to appreciate being called old and tired for your taste preferences!

DirecTV doesn't have that same kind of problem - no one uses cable because they just fucking love cable so much - but nevertheless, this campaign implies that people who use cable are somehow inferior. Which is just sort of weirdly insulting, and hardly the thing that's going to get people beating a path to your door, especially given how strong the pull of inertia is. DirecTV may indeed be more reliable than cable, but as long as your cable is pretty reliable, I can't imagine that being compared to Super Creepy Rob Lowe is doing much to convince you to switch. There may be a subset of people who are so unhappy with cable that literally any pitch will sway them, but I'm guessing it's not huge. Oh, and I hope everyone in that subset has a clear view of the southern sky.

Colorado, why don't you come to your senses

A few years ago, Dodge ran a campaign that I tore into on this here blog. The premise of that campaign was, predominantly, that Dodge cars were manly cars for men. (The kind of cars you could drink a Dr. Pepper Ten while driving, perhaps.) The ads were laughably inconsistent - when marketing the Charger, Dodge implied that it was unmanly to drive a minivan, but as soon as it had to sell the Grand Caravan, suddenly driving a minivan was the manliest thing on God's green earth. It was really kind of pathetic. Fortunately, Dodge has backed down from this embarrassing stance. Unfortunately, here comes Chevy to fill the void.



A version of this ad, though perhaps not the exact same one, aired during the Super Bowl. And Chevy's pitch is right there on the table: buy a truck or you're a loser.

Announcer: "Can a truck change how people feel about a guy?"

Maybe? People feel different ways about people for all sorts of reasons. The real question is whether said guy should make important purchasing decisions based exclusively on that.

Announcer: "We talked to real people. Not actors."

The lady doth protest too much, methinks. But let's assume these are real people; who gives a shit? Real people are just as likely to give you the answer they know you want to hear as an actor you've handed a script. Especially when giving the right answer is going to get them on television.

Announcer: "We showed them two pictures of the same guy in the same location."

Right away you can see the problem with this, right? People aren't stupid. You think they didn't know this was the same guy? You think they didn't know the only difference in the photos was that one guy was standing in front of your truck and one was standing in front of a Honda Civic or whatever? So with that in mind, how much weight do you REALLY want to put in their answers? Oh, all of it? Okay.

Interviewer: "Which man is sexier?"
Women: "Truck."
Woman: "That one has way more sex appeal."

That's right, guys: unless you drive a Chevy Colorado, no woman will EVER want to fuck you. Mark it down!

Woman: "This [car] guy is definitely the guy your mom wants you to marry, and this [truck] is the guy you're gonna run off to, and leave him, to be with him."

I'm thinking car guy dodged a real bullet on this one. Seriously, though, am I supposed to be taking any of this seriously? These women know why they're there. Fuck, the truck has a prominent Chevy logo while the car isn't even marked. We're here to talk about a truck. And then they get asked an insipid question like judging the sex appeal of two identical guys based solely on the vehicle photoshopped in behind them. What are they gonna say?

Announcer: "You know you want a truck."

I hated it when Kraft tried to use this kind of slogan, and I hate it now. Trying to tell me, the consumer, what I want is just the most embarrassing kind of desperation. You can't just encourage me to buy your product? You have to try and be like, "I know you don't think you want this. But you do! Secretly you do. Chevy sees into your dreams and we know your darkest fears. Buy a Colorado... unless you want people to find out what happened at summer camp in 1994?"

Here's the thing about this when it comes to the Colorado (or any truck) in particular. If you need a truck, go ahead and get a truck. Like, do you have a boat you need to haul out to the lake and back? Great! Get a truck! No problem here. But you don't need to sell trucks to those people with this angle because (a) they probably already have a truck if they need it for real reasons and (b) they do know they want a truck and so don't need to be told that. So who is this marketing to? Guys in general. Guys who drive compact, or maybe midsize, cars like the total weenies that they are.

For instance, take a look at this spot:



This doesn't even make a ton of sense, really. So we have this one guy arriving at the office on what is presumably supposed to be a Monday morning, and he's driving what looks like a Honda Civic or similar. He gets to be represented by a Carpenters song. But then he crosses paths with our bad-ass hero, represented by AC/DC, who drives the Chevy Colorado. But what is the deal with his work schedule? Has he been there all night? All weekend? Or does he just get to come and go as he pleases, because... he drives a truck? Also, there's no visible reason in the ad for him to have or need a truck. He has one because he wants to, I guess. Which is fair enough. But is that really practical? Am I really supposed to be super impressed by a guy who drives a truck in the city for no reason?

Just to ram it home, here's Chevy's copy below that ad on YouTube:

"When you're behind the wheel of Motor Trend’s 2015 Truck of the Year, you sit differently and you walk differently. And suddenly the world is different. The world is yours for the taking."

Look, bullshit, okay? You walk differently? Come on. I know advertisers are pretty much obligated to pump the shit out of their products, but this is just nonsense.

(Oh, and lest we think that Chevy is not completely serious about pushing this angle to the limit, just check out some of the ancillary content they've got on YouTube, which includes "We gave this guy a truck and it improved his dating profile" and, no shit, "We made a fake deodorant and some people bought it, therefore trucks are cool." I really don't even have anything to add here.)

Let's get back to fundamentals for a second. Back when I wrote that Dodge post, I cited market research showing that women made more than 50% of all new vehicle purchases and influenced 80% of all vehicle sales overall. That was five years ago, but I can't imagine things have changed TOO much since then. In addition, according to this review of the 2015 Colorado by one of the editors at AutoGuide.com, the midsize truck segment has been "withering away for years." If you're trying to kickstart it, do you really want to market yourself so narrowly? You're pretty much ignoring women entirely! Of course, you're also marketing your truck almost exclusively to the kind of man who doesn't really need a truck but is worried about being seen as less sexy, or as the kind of pansy who owns birds instead of a German shepherd, or as soul patch guy instead of mutton chops guy. (Side note: holy FUCK these ads are embarrassingly reductive.) So, not really opening up a big segment of the market there, maybe?

I'd guess the midsize truck market is kind of a tough sell. If you need a truck regularly, you might prefer a larger truck (like Chevy's Silverado, the GMC Sierra, the Dodge Ram, etc.) that can handle a wider range of activities. And if you rarely if ever need a truck, there's not much reason to buy a truck, is there? One can't help but wonder if GM's push here is based on the hope that plummeting gas prices will make people more willing to buy enormous, impractical cars again. (I mean: remember how ubiquitous Hummer was for a while? Did you know that brand became completely defunct five years ago? There's a reason for that.)

But of course, people aren't just going to buy big-ass trucks they don't have any need for, no matter how cheap gas is. So what's the next move? Try to make it about image. Sure, you may not NEED a pickup truck. But aren't they cool? Aren't they rugged? Wouldn't you feel like more of a man if you were driving one? Look, Chevy, I can get a German shepherd for a lot less than the cost of a truck that will apparently make children think I own one. Building a whole ad campaign around lazy stereotypes aimed at insecure single men in the 25-45 age range might work, I suppose. But you guys better pray that gas prices don't rebound any time soon.

What really kills me about the whole thing is that Chevy's first piece of Colorado-related content on YouTube (which I've never seen on TV, needless to say) is actually pretty good:



Like, that's an acceptable amount of swagger for a car commercial. And it actually shows the truck being used in places where I'd expect to need or want a truck. It shows some things it's good for. It shows people of both sexes using the truck! And most impressively, it doesn't bother trying to call you a wuss if you aren't interested. So, obviously, Chevy dumped it when it came time to truly market the Colorado. I mean, advertising that isn't insulting to the viewer's intelligence? Who'd want that?

I'm really, really hating it

For a long time, McDonald's was not just the unquestioned leader in its industry, it was also responsible for a lot of memorable ads. The last couple of years... not so much. First we had this ridiculousness, then we had the biggest asshole in commercial history, and then we had... hand dancing. Oh, did we ever have hand dancing.

Yet overall I would still have said that McDonald's was probably the least offensive ad maker in its cohort, if only because of sheer volume - yeah, the coffee guy is a huge asshole, but it's not like that was the only ad McDonald's was running. Recently, though, they've just gone completely off the rails.

For instance, what the hell is this?



Let me say right off the bat that I LOATHE the entire "the simple joy of X" campaign. I hate everything about it. The "simple joy" of cheap, shitty food cranked out by minimum-wagers on behalf of a multinational corporation? Fuck off. But that's just the start of the indignities perpetrated by this series of ads.

Husband: "I'm home! ...oh."
Wife: "Where were you?"
Husband: "Uh, I was just in the car."
Wife: "The car? What's that on your collar?"
Husband: "Hm? Oh... tie?"
Wife: "Why do you seem happy?"
Husband: "I'm not..."
Wife: "Come here."
Husband: "Okay."
Wife: [smells him] "Mint. Wow."
Husband: "I had a Shamrock Shake."
Wife: "I hate you."
Husband: "And I got one for you, too..."
Wife: "I love you!"

This is deranged. This is mental patient level shit. The wife almost certainly has some sort of personality disorder, probably something in Cluster B. Also, she mouths "I love you" at the shake as she walks away. She has PROBLEMS. But McDonald's doesn't seem to see anything wrong here. To them, this is perfectly acceptable behavior where the Shamrock Shake is concerned. See:

Announcer: "The magical minty flavor you'll covet with all your heart."

GET. THE. FUCK. OVER. YOURSELVES. I guess it's probably hard not to be supremely arrogant and self-centered when you're a company like McDonald's. They are the dominant global force in fast food. In 2010, McDonald's had revenues of more than $24 billion, a figure greater than the gross domestic products of nearly 100 countries. So, you could argue, McDonald's doesn't really have anything left to sell. They could never run another ad and they'd probably do just fine. And when they run ads implying that people are functionally addicted to their food, I guess they have the sales figures to back that up. But FUCK is it annoying.

What's really grating is the straight-facedness of it all. These commercials seem designed to appeal to a younger crowd, and they have the vibe of post-modern ads that are all about joking and almost playfully undermining the product. But if there's one thing McDonald's does not do, it's undermine its products. No, McDonald's inflates them to almost godlike statures.



THIS IS ANNOYING. It is annoying and terrible. This is a lot like that "bigger than the Big Mac" ad from five years ago that was actually the first McDonald's ad to make this site. See, McDonald's, here's the thing. You're really famous. Everyone recognizes the arches, everyone knows the Big Mac song in spite of the fact that it hasn't been the centerpiece of a campaign in like decades. But NO ONE uses your food as a reference point. NO ONE. "It's the Egg McMuffin of X" is not something that ANYONE has EVER said in ANY context, outside of the actors during the filming of this commercial. And are there really even people who think of the Egg McMuffin as the most delicious food item ever invented, such that this ad would begin to make a lick of sense? I feel sad for them, if so.

You can't even claim it's tongue in cheek. It's not tongue in cheek. McDonald's has the clout to say that their products are fantastic and addictive and world-defining, and they are totally serious about it. Maybe they're not wrong. But it's extremely obnoxious.

My two least favorite McDonald's ads at the moment, of course, I can't find on YouTube (not copies worth posting, anyway). If anyone can turn up a decent copy of the ad with the two old guys or the "I've been around" ad, let me know.

Low Voltage

The 2006 documentary Who Killed the Electric Car? is an exploration of the reasons why the initial attempt at production of electric cars in America failed. Various possible reasons were cited, including the desire of the oil companies to spike a competing fuel source, a lack of appeal to consumers, and fears on the part of the automakers that long-term revenues would drop because electric cars required comparatively little maintenance.

Well, between last fall's ad campaign for the Chevy Volt and the one they've started running recently, I think I have an idea for a sequel in case the electric car fails again: shitty advertising.



What?

[A bunch of aliens are examining the Chevy Volt in a guy's garage.]
Alien: "Chevy Volt!"
Guy: "Guys... this is the third time this week."
[Aliens look somewhat chastened]
Guy: "Okay, I'll say it again. It's electric..."
Alien: "Electric."
Guy: "But when I need to go farther, it uses gas."
Alien: "Gas."
Guy: "Please, tell me you understand..."

You know what, Chevy? Don't fucking flatter yourself. Do you think really think this idea is such a hard concept? Hey, it uses electric and gas! Congratulations, it's a fucking hybrid, except it reverses the typical order of fuel usage. EVERYONE GETS IT. It was bad enough in the initial ad where the premise was "idiots at the gas station will hassle you because they're confused, because this is just WAY too complicated for people to grasp." Now we're really out in the depths of the egos of Chevy's design team. "That's right, not even space aliens who have mastered the technology of interstellar travel understand how a car could possibly have two power sources!"

Here's how a Chevy Volt ad plays out in real life. Ready?

Guy: "Hey, I thought that was an electric car."
Volt owner: "Yeah, it mostly is, but it does use gas as a backup power source for longer trips."
Guy: "Oh, okay."

FIN, assholes. No one is confused by the Chevy Volt. And by pretending that everyone is, you're making yourselves look like supercilious dicks.

I'm not even going to talk about the ridiculous "punchline" to this ad, since it doesn't deserve comment. I will say, though, between the electric car and the aliens, was anyone else reminded of "We Do," the song sung by the Stonecutters in the classic Simpsons episode "Homer the Great," when they saw this ad? I'm just saying, if Steve Guttenberg pops up in the next Volt ad I'm gonna be really suspicious.

Forget smartphones, get a smarmphone

Leave it to Apple to concoct the smarmiest, most defensive ad campaign of the year.



Smug Douchebag Announcer: "If you don't have an iPhone, you don't have iBooks. So you don't have your favorite books in your pocket."

The emphasis on "your" there is weird, like if you buy an Android Phone it jams a hundred books you don't like down your pants. "Hey! Get out of there, the complete Dean Koontz oeuvre!"

SDA: "And you don't have the iBook store, an entire bookstore in your pocket."

Just in case you couldn't figure out what "the iBook store" could possibly be referring to, here's another whole clause!

SDA: "So whether you're looking for a certain author or a New York Times best-seller, a good book is just a tap away."

Certainly not true of any other product!

SDA: "Yup, if you don't have an iPhone, well, you don't have an iPhone."

Tautology moves a lot of product, let me tell you.

The whole series of these ads is so obnoxiously smug that, frankly, it completely turns me off from ever wanting an iPhone. And it's not just that they treat themselves like the hottest shit on the planet. Take this ad, for instance - the iPhone is trying to throw its body in front of e-readers like Amazon's Kindle, Barnes and Noble's Nook, and etc. And that's all well and good, I guess, except that the iPhone isn't really a competitor to those products. It's a phone. It's great how much other stuff it does, but if I want to read a book and don't want an actual book, I'm going to get an e-reader. The iPhone screen is like four inches! Yeah, can't wait to be hunched over Moby-Dick on a screen that size. It's like that T-Mobile commercial that brags about the phone that comes preloaded with Inception, as though anyone is excited to watch Inception, a film noteworthy for its visuals, on a tiny screen in the palm of their hand. I swear, sometimes I feel like the more things they make smartphones do, the less excited I am about it. I want a phone that makes calls and can surf the internet. I don't need to watch tiny, tiny movies or read tiny, tiny books. There are other devices that can do those things on the go in a way that isn't completely stupid, and if I need to do them that badly, I'll get one of those devices.

Are there 80 million variants on how much of a stupid jerk you are for not having an iPhone? Of course there are.

SDA: "If you don't have an iPhone, you don't have an iPod in your phone."

A necessary thing that everyone should have! Also, pretty much every smartphone plays music, asshole.

SDA: "With your music, and your playlists."

Again with the overemphasis on how this will be stuff you like, as though it's not true of anything else. Windows Phone finds out what music you like and then deliberately recommends completely unrelated tracks. Android phones come preloaded exclusively with fifteen remixes of "My Humps" by the Black Eyed Peas. I know the idea is how great it is that the iPhone can sync to iTunes, but really, BFD.

SDA: "And you don't have iTunes on your phone, the world's #1 music store."

Hey, have you heard of iTunes? No? Well, apparently it's some kind of music store. Good thing they told us that, or this ad would have been really confusing. Now it's time for some applesauce - open wide for the airplane!

(My phone, which is not an iPhone as you can probably guess, comes with direct access to the Amazon.com MP3 store, which is basically the exact same thing as the iTunes store. So... no, Apple, I really don't care.)

SDA: "With Genius, that recommends new music based on the songs you already have."

Do not care. At all. Every online music company in the world recommends music based on your established likes. And who buys songs on their phone based on a recommendation without even listening to them first?

SDA: "Yup, if you don't have an iPhone, go fuck yourself."

Well, maybe he didn't say that. But he may as well have. I find the tone of ads like this completely counterproductive. It's 30 seconds of telling any iPhone-less viewer that they're an idiot for not having one because it's just that great. Why would you want to talk down to consumers? Unless that was the point...

Adman 1: Okay, time to get to work on the new iPhone commercial, guys. What should we focus on?

Adman 2: All the great features!

Adman 3: The ways in which it's better than other phones!

Adman 4: The douchey self-satisfaction you get from owning one!

Adman 5: The inherent superiority of iPhone owners to other humans!

Adman 1: Those are all pretty great ideas. Anyone have a slogan?

Adman 4: "If you don't have an iPhone, go get one right now, you stupid twit!"

Adman 5: "If you don't have an iPhone, you probably also don't have a BRAIN!"

Adman 1: Okay, um, not bad, but maybe a little bit too on the nose. We don't want to insult potential customers.

Adman 5: We don't?

Adman 4: The iPhone is still made by Apple, right? I mean, have you ever seen an Apple ad before? Those Mac vs. PC ads are classic examples of insulting the consumer!

Adman 5: Apple products sell themselves by word of mouth. The whole point of the TV ads is just to make people who already own Apple products feel even more satisfied with themselves than they already do. They're like "attaboy" pats on the back for people who own Apple stuff.

Adman 1: Wow. Okay. What about something like "If you don't have an iPhone, you don't have an iPhone?"

Adman 4: ...maybe. But can you get the guy talking to sound like he's much, much better than anyone who doesn't have one?

Adman 5: Gotta have that sense of superiority. It justifies the inflated purchase price.

Adman 1: Okay, I think we're all done here.

The iPhone! If you don't have one, how are you supposed to feel like a better person than all the other losers?

A piece of Kraft

I decided to look into the Crispin Porter + Bogusky oeuvre to see what else they'd done, because in spite of our hate for the Groupon and Best Buy ads, and our historical hate for their Burger King and Microsoft campaigns, surely, surely they must not exclusively produce crap ads, right?

I'm still looking.



You know what I don't love? Ads that take a product traditionally aimed at children and try to pretend that it's something that is or should be beloved by adults. I've never been able to turn up proof of this, but I'm quite sure that sometime in the early to mid-1990s Cookie Crisp started running ads suggesting that adults could also eat it as kind of a snack food. It was ridiculous then, and it's ridiculous now.

If you've ever had real macaroni and cheese - I mean made from scratch - you know that Kraft's equivalent is like mixing baker's chocolate with Splenda and calling it a Belgian truffle. It is not good. And sure, each to his own taste, but it's objectively of lower quality, even if you still like it. There's no way this dad is so obsessed with it that he's just standing there cramming it into his stupid face.

Of course, that ad is more annoying than truly terrible. Don't worry. It gets worse.



I hate nearly everything about this one.

Girl: "So get this. Kraft Mac and Cheese, but it's in a bag."

Everyone was familiar with the fact that it came in a box, right? And cared?

Girl: "And you bake it. In the oven."

Thereby taking away the only real reason to eat Kraft Mac and Cheese in the first place, which is that it takes slightly less time to make than to make real macaroni and cheese from scratch.

Girl: "Whatever happened to Cheeseasaurus Rex? I love that guy!"

WARNING: MASSIVE EDITORIALIZING OF OUR OWN ADS! "Hey, remember our shitty old mascot we just got rid of? He was totally super popular!" I'm surprised CP+B's recent Domino's ads didn't have people demanding the return of the Noid, too. Also, what's this kid, 9? How long has it been since Cheeseasaurus Rex was actually named in the Kraft ads?

Girl: "Well, Kraft Corporation, I'm on to you. Going after the grownups and trying to muscle me out?"

Revealing your marketing strategy in your copy: super edgy.

Girl: "But I'm not going anywhere."

Yeah, Kraft Mac and Cheese is likely to still be more enjoyed by kids than adults. What was the point of this ad?

As the mac and cheese is pulled out of the oven, pay close attention to the fine print, which states: "Optional oven finish." So basically you're trying to make it look classy on TV, but the fact is that most people are not going to bother to do that extra work as though bread crumbs will make you think your grandma made this.

Announcer: "New Kraft Homestyle Macaroni and Cheese. Cheesy noodles topped with golden brown bread crumbs."

So macaroni and cheese. Only not as good.

Announcer: "You know you love it."

I loathe this tagline. Absolutely hate it. Why is this the pitch? Seems to me the idea is that adults secretly love Kraft Mac and Cheese but refuse to admit it because it's supposed to be for kids. As though, being adults, we don't have the option to buy whatever the fuck we want. If I want to buy Kraft Mac and Cheese, I will. But I don't, because it sucks, no matter how many bread crumbs you sprinkle on it. Don't try to tell me what I love and don't love, Kraft, you assholes. I will make my own grocery buying decisions and you will like it. Fuck you.

And here's the latest one.



Is that the same girl? She looks pretty similar. If so, did her mom recently suffer some sort of brain injury that caused her to forget about Kraft Macaroni and Cheese? (Wouldn't that be the life.)

Let's say that it's either a different girl or is supposed to be. How does this ad make sense? If the mom has never purchased Kraft, then the kid has never had it; if the kid has never had it, how does she know to want it? Even if you assume it's because she saw an ad for it, she seems really certain of how good it's going to taste for someone who's never eaten it.

I'm also no fan of the disdain with which this ad treats the mother's cooking. Okay, so Kraft is trying to "eliminate its competition" or whatever, something common enough in the ad world. But this seems questionable at best. "Hey! Parents! You know the food you're cooking and serving to your kids? Yeah, they fucking hate it. Get with the program and start making them pasta from a bag, and maybe when the revolution comes you won't be the first against the wall. Kraft: We Will Destroy You. I mean, You Know You Love It."

Guess what, Kraft. I didn't like it when Pizza Hut took this angle and I don't like it now. You make shitty processed pasta in a bag and/or box. This is no one's idea of a wonder meal (well, maybe this guy's). Unless someone is a particularly bad cook, it probably does not outclass something they made from scratch, and the idea that we should all just stop making real food and settle for pre-packaged crap is obnoxious at best. Or, why not go the other way and just make the tagline that much clearer?

Kraft: You Know You Can't Cook

Kraft: You Know Your Kids Hate You

Kraft: Stop Embarrassing Yourself

Kraft: Fuck You and the Casserole You Rode In On

It's the cost that counts

So you want the most expensive thing in the store and your parents won't buy it for you. Instead, they offer you a lower-cost option that is pretty similar. What does this make them? That's right: inconsiderate assholes.



[Kid admiring undoubtedly expensive electric train set]
Mom: "How about this one? It's almost the same thing."
Kid: [insufferably] "No. It's not."

Fuck this kid, am I right? Your parents aren't obligated to buy you anything, you ungrateful little bastard.

Dad: "This one's great! It's just as good as the one you wanted."
Kid: "No... it's not."

This just makes me feel really bad for the dad. Listen to how he sells that first line. The mom seemed kind of noncommittal - "Eh, this other one seems okay, right?" - but the dad sounds legitimately invested in the quality of the guitar he's holding, and Flock of Seagulls just shits all over him. How much do you suppose that kid even knows about guitars? "Uh, hello, Dad? This guitar looks cooler and is five times more expensive, therefore it's better."

Guy: "That's the one."
Salesman: "Great choice."
Voiceover: "Don't settle for a copy when you can have the original."

If you can afford it, sure. I'm fairly certain that if Seagulls' dad was swimming in cash he'd have been happy to buy his obnoxious son whatever expensive guitar he wanted - so clearly he wasn't, meaning what we have is this douchebag kid griping every year because his middle-class parents can't and/or won't cater to his every whim. Great message, BMW. Hey, did your parents buy you exactly what you wanted for Christmas every year, no matter the price point? They didn't? Well, fuck them - treat yourself with a $40,000 luxury car this Christmas! Can you afford that? Who the fuck cares? You're an adult now and you don't settle for copies, whatever that means. Also, your kids eat cookies and ice cream for dinner and stay up as late as they want, because you're just the kind of guy who follows through on all the whiny shit he said as a ten-year-old when he didn't get his way.

The Battle of Car-atoga

A couple years ago, I made a post about a Pepsi ad that implied that a young Jimi Hendrix was inspired to play guitar because of his love for Pepsi. In it, I joked that Pepsi rejected a script suggesting that Pepsi also inspired Thomas Jefferson to write the Declaration of Independence. As it happens, there are two commercials out right now that took that ball and ran with it. I couldn't find one online, so here's the other.



To say that Dodge has been going a bit over the top with its ad campaign lately is probably understating it. First, they mocked you alternately for being a big pussy who drives a minivan and for being a big pussy who doesn't drive a minivan. (Can't win with these guys.) Now... well, look, I know this ad is not seriously suggesting that George Washington drove a Dodge Challenger. But what is it suggesting?

The takeaway association is that Dodge, as a company, is somehow emblematic of the American spirit. America got freedom right, and we, Dodge, got cars right! At the risk of appearing humorless, I just find this ad kind of crass. It's one thing to be a goofy local ad where some guy dressed as George Washington says, "I cannot tell a lie - Discount Warehouse has great deals!" It's quite another to be a major corporation running a straight-faced ad implying that Washington would have approved of your business model.

The more annoying thing, of course, is that this is the only pitch. Anything to say about the car? No. Totally fake scenario in which the car is being awesome? Sure, I guess. It's not like this is even an impressive driving shot or something like so many car commercials feature. And I dare you to take your Dodge Challenger out into some random field and see how it does.

Also, we're allies with the British, people. Maybe we don't need to run an ad which depicts them as initially oppressive and then cowardly in the face of our superior automobiles? I picture David Cameron seeing this and then changing the channel while muttering darkly, "Bloody hell, Yanks, it was 230 years ago! Let it go!"

Better pizza, bigger annoyance

I'm sure you've seen the ads that Domino's has been running recently, in which they show focus groups talking about how shitty their pizza is, and then they go back to those same people and go, "Hey, we fixed it! Do you love us now?" And those people are like, "Yeah, this pizza is now totally great!" Although at least some of them basically admitted that they might not have been so critical had they known Domino's was actually going to look at the video, and so maybe they're just saying it's great because they're ON FUCKING TELEVISION THIS TIME but whatever. Maybe it's great now. (If you haven't seen the ads, they were mostly chopped down out of this big fucker.)

I'm just saying: if you've just run an ad campaign talking about how your pizza was super terrible to the point that you had to completely fix the recipe, I'm not sure I'd make this my next move.



Domino's Chef: "For years, Papa John's has been telling us they have 'Better ingredients, better pizza. But when challenged in this court, they stated their slogan is 'puffery.'"

Yeah, uh, question for the pizza chef. Are you telling me that Domino's actually took Papa John's to motherfucking court over the wording of their slogan? Because that seems like some kind of ridiculous bullshit.

Chef: "What's puffery? Scott, you're a lawyer."
Scott: "Puffery: 'An exaggerated statement based on opinion. Not fact.'"
Chef: [shrugs dramatically]

Look, if you want to be all serious about this, it's very easy to argue that "better" is ill-defined and that Papa John's is not necessarily claiming to be literally better - whatever that would entail - than other pizza chains. But also, during the "years" when Papa John's was claiming this, Domino's pizza was apparently complete shit. You guys just ran ads telling us how your pizza used to be awful, and apparently you only fixed it in December. Are you mad because Papa John's didn't change their slogan immediately after you changed your recipe? Because it doesn't seem like there's any real impetus on them to do that. Unless you took them to court over it like total douchebags. (And if you didn't really take them to court and you're just saying that to make a more "interesting" commercial... well, that's just puffery, my friends.)

Chef: "Here's what's not puffery. Our new hand-tossed sausage, extra cheese and pepperoni pizzas just beat Papa John's in a national taste test."

Okay, good for you, but again, I'm assuming this just happened since your new pizza is still, you know, new. So what were you criticizing them for? This is like if after Barack Obama was inaugurated, he made some speech that was like, "For years we've heard George Bush give speeches like he was the president. But I just checked and it turns out I'm the president right now! George Bush should stop calling himself the president." And then everyone would have been like, "Wow, we just elected the dumbest man alive." Honestly, Domino's, do you just have no concept of time passing? Is your ad agency run by dogs? What is happening here?"

Chef: "Our pizzas taste better and that's not puffery. That's proven."

I mean, I guess. You'll forgive me if I don't necessarily take a bunch of nobodies' opinions on the taste of pizza as some sort of gospel truth. Also, see everything I already wrote, you stupid asshole. Does Domino's really think that behaving like some nitpicky douchebags is going to win them any friends? Do they think that people take advertising slogans so seriously that this was in any way needed? Are there people who would actually be like, "I don't know, Domino's, you say this new pizza of yours is good, but I just saw a Papa John's ad and they specifically said, 'Better pizza.' So, whatever, that clearly must be true." Because if there are, I'm really afraid.

Annoying. So annoying.

Hotels.com's ads used to be... well, stupid. But in a sort of affable way. Like this:



See? Stupid. I see this and think "Reviews from people like me? How much of a weirdo do you think I am?" Nevertheless, there's a kind of good-humored air about it, like they're implicitly admitting that they're just trying to have a good time with their advertising.

Not so anymore.



Fuck this ad. Okay? Fuck it.

First of all, the question is thoroughly begged when you name your main character "Smart." What is that, even? Last name? Nickname? Ah, who the fuck cares.

Woman: "What's up, Smart?"
Smart: "Being smart."

Fuck you.

Smart: "Yep, just booked my tenth night on Hotels.com, sooo... I get a night free."

Oh my God, you super-genius, you! You... took advantage of a company's offer! I hope you needed all those ten nights. Otherwise you're like moms who come home with three 12-packs of Coke because it was on sale, even though no one in the house drinks Coke. As it is you're like someone bragging because he got the final stamp on his Subway Club card. No one cares, douchebag.

Smart: "You, me, getaway."

"Sexual harassment. So sexual harassment."

Woman: "Really? Where?"
Smart: "Anywhere you want."
Woman: "A bed and breakfast?"
Smart: "Bed and breakfast? Check."
Woman: "A place by the beach?"
Smart: "A place by awesome."

Again, fuck you. Also, that second place is clearly not a bed and breakfast. What are the odds she was changing her request entirely as opposed to modifying it to "a bed and breakfast by the beach?" Some fucking smart guy you are.

Woman: "Oh! You are smart."

Sound the editorializing alarm! Also, why the fuck is he smart? I guess taking advantage of a rewards program is smarter than not doing so - assuming you already have reason to be booking a significant number of hotel rooms - but it hardly makes you a super-genius, any more than clipping detergent coupons out of the Sunday paper qualifies you to run NASA. It's not that I think Hotels.com should talk about their product in an equivocal fashion, but how about not giving us a pitchman at the apex of obnoxious douchiness? (I also love that even in Claymation that woman is clearly way too hot for him.)

Announcer: "Accumulate ten nights and get a night free. Welcome Rewards from Hotels.com. Smart. So smart."

Again, I'm not saying this isn't a good deal. But do you have to pose it in so smarmy a fashion? This is maybe one rung above Hyundai's "Big Duh" sales event of 2007. Is it really so hard to suggest that something is a good idea without insulting the audience's intelligence?

In conclusion... fuck this thing.

There's a bunch of crap for that

I cannot stand commercials that simply refuse to make a lick of goddamn sense.



This means nothing. This is nothing. Why do the reindeer need "maps"? The maps are supposed to show Verizon's 3G coverage in the United States. (Santa Claus, if real, is not located in the United States.) The reindeer somehow need 3G coverage? And it somehow matters that all eight (nine?) of them have Verizon's network? Good luck getting a reindeer to work a phone, by the way. Shouldn't Santa just have a phone? The reindeer are all pulling the same sleigh - even if their 3G coverage was in any way relevant, I'm pretty sure seven out of eight would be sufficient.

Hey, here's a thought. Maybe instead of completely wasting the first ten seconds of the commercial on nothing at all, you could have spent some of that time doing anything to explain why Blitzen's "map" is a problem, other than having the smarmy-ass reindeer next to him just go "Uh, your map?" No, you'll stick with that? Okay.

The jabs in this war between AT&T and Verizon are really getting increasingly ridiculous. See, for particular example, this AT&T ad:



"Hey, you see this thing that has no connection to reality whatsoever? AT&T totally does it faster than Verizon!" Most of the AT&T commercials in response to Verizon's "there's a map for that" ads have really been oddly evasive (presumably out of necessity). Verizon's talking about our coverage? Better talk about download speeds! But be sure to make it really opaque by not giving any real examples and instead discussing how long it would take to download a complete human being. What? Or how about this one:



Really, you have to love the way both of them are pretending that the other's network is a total piece of shit when, if we take all the claims in these ads at more or less face value, there are perfectly legitimate reasons for each to be preferred by certain people. If you live somewhere where both have coverage, maybe you'd prefer AT&T and its better download speeds. But if you live in one of the many, many places that apparently don't get AT&T, maybe you'd prefer Verizon. Over nothing.

Ultimately, though, I think Verizon comes out on top, mostly because AT&T's biggest initial response was a classic example of selective omission:



You notice what he's not saying in there, of course - 3G. Verizon's ads talk about how their 3G coverage is better, so AT&T responds by saying, "Verizon's talking about coverage. Well, here's who AT&T covers!" Not who AT&T covers with 3G... just people who can use AT&T wireless phone service at all. Yeah, that's not deceptive. You'll notice that they don't mention the 97% of Americans thing in any of their ads talking about 3G speed and such. Also, in this ad they only mention ten cities, most of which are very large. Wow, you have coverage in major US cities, AT&T? No way! (Not the first time AT&T has felt it necessary to brag about having coverage in large American cities as though that were uncommon, it should be noted.)

For being somewhat less deceptive and not using a Luke Wilson in full smug as their spokesman, I give this round to Verizon. On the other hand, if this ad means that we've finally gotten rid of that awful family and their one-note joke about wanting to use new minutes, AT&T wins by default.

That's the money you could be saving by not eating a lousy hamburger

While it's not like we've never featured McDonald's on this blog, they're not usually responsible for commercials quite this... let's say obnoxiously stupid. Maybe it's just a Quarter Pounder with Cheese thing.



Oh boy.

Voiceover: "The Quarter Pounder with Cheese knows you're looking at it."

No, it does not. Because it doesn't have eyes or a brain capable of processing sensory input (much less translating that input into thought). And if it did, it would probably be too busy focusing on the fact that it was getting devoured.

Voiceover: "And it's looking right back at you."

We just went over this: no eyes. At least Geico had the decency to put googly eyes on a stack of money when they ran an ad with what is, by the way, basically the exact same concept as the first 25 seconds of this spot.

Voiceover: "It knows how great it tastes. If you can't help but stare at its 100% pure beefy cheesiness..."

Was this commercial written by a 12-year-old? I must confess I do not understand, at all, this impulse to write such utterly dumbed-down, annoying copy.

Voiceover: "...that's your deal."

Hey, idiot. You're in a McDonald's. You want a fucking Quarter Pounder, dig into your pocket for what, two bucks, go up to the counter and order one. No need to stare at some poor slob who's just trying to choke down an extremely mediocre lunch.

Voiceover: "It's available. You know that."

Yeah, I just said that. Go order one, dummy, if you want it so much. Though I don't know why you would. Look at the burger that guy's holding. He's actually eating it, so it can't be one of the fake burgers they use in promo shots that look good because they're held together with pins, and the grill marks are painted on, and shit like that. It appears to be a real burger. And doesn't it kind of look like shit? Is that damp gray burger and limp, neon yellow cheese really making anyone hungry? I might have tried a little harder to actually push the burger, rather than just be like, "Hey, you know you want one." Because I pretty well know that I do not want one.

Voiceover: "The Quarter Pounder with Cheese. It's cheese, and beef, and cheese. And that's what's up."

First of all, Quarter Pounder sales must really be in the tank if McDonald's felt the need to build an entire ad campaign around a single menu item that isn't even brand new. Second of all, I can see why - is there a restaurant on the planet where I can't get a significantly more appealing 1/4-pound cheeseburger? Third of all, fuck this commercial. If your product really sold itself, guess what? You wouldn't need to advertise. Ads like this make me even less likely to buy something, not that I had any plans to eat a Quarter Pounder regardless.

Vaguely healthy fast food alternatives? Surely you jest!

As you may have noticed, Burger King has really been getting on my nerves in the months I've been doing this blog. It took this next ad a while to show up online in a format even remotely suitable for viewing, but here it is. "Enjoy."



I'm on the record as supporting ad wars when they're done right, but this is just stupid. It's confusing, for one thing; doesn't Burger King lead Wendy's in sales? This is like Pepsi doing an ad that makes fun of RC Cola while giving Coke a free pass. It's not that ads where #2 takes on #1 seem to work very well, but why even go the other direction? And why does Burger King insist on representing one of its menu items as an obnoxious teenager in a hamburger costume?

Whopper Jr.: "Let's go take 'em out, yeah?"
Chicken Crisp: "Yeah."
Whopper Jr.: "We've got business to handle!"

Take 'em out? For serious? And what's with this now-hackneyed "documentary" style? I must have missed the memo where Burger King is now exclusively targeting 16-year-old white suburban kids who find Borat to be the height of comedy.

Whopper Jr.: "Hey, can I - can I get a Whopper Jr., please?"
Wendy's Speaker: "This is - this is not Burger King. That's at Burger King. Sorry."

Oh. Man. Motherfucking owned, Wendy's! PWN3D, even! I can't believe you don't have Burger King products on your menu! Up is down, black is white... what is happening???

This tactic of making fun of other restaurants for not selling their products - which would probably get them sued anyway - is an interesting one on Burger King's part. I would suggest that they didn't go nearly far enough with it, though. Why not have Whopper Jr. go into a pet shop and ask for a Whopper, only to be told that all they sell there are adorable puppies? In your fucking face, pet shop! And imagine the pwnage that will ensue when Chicken Crisp discovers that the local hardware store will sell him nails and screwdrivers, but nothing even resembling the Enormous Omelet Sandwich!

Whopper Jr.: "Can I get some flame-broiled beef, please? Got any of that?"
Wendy's Speaker: "Uh, we don't do that here."

I suppose this is intended as a counterargument to Wendy's "fresh, never frozen" pitch. The question thus becomes - is frozen and flame-broiled beef better-tasting than fresh but grilled beef? I really have no idea, but I will say that I've eaten one Burger King burger in my life and I wouldn't exactly call the flame-broiling noticeable.

Wendy's Speaker: "Do you want a sour cream and chive potato?"
Whopper Jr.: "A baked potat- a baked pota- are we in Russia?"

That joke was much funnier the first time, when I heard it in Caddyshack. Also, that was 1980 and Russia was still a Communist state, so it kind of made sense then. I suppose Russians probably eat a lot of potatoes. The potato is a pretty major vegetable on the world scale, so a lot of people eat potatoes. What's more, a baked potato is a relatively healthy option on a fast-food level; Wendy's sour cream and chive potato has 320 calories and four grams of fat, as well as being fairly rich in vitamin C and potassium. A Whopper Jr. has 370 calories and 21 grams of fat, and that's with no cheese. The Whopper Jr. also weighs a full 150 grams less than a sour cream and chive potato from Wendy's, giving it a fat weight percentage of 14%. The potato? 1.3%. But I guess you're right - this being America, the idea of an even remotely healthy option on a fast food menu is kind of anathema, especially to the type of person who would find this ad funny in the first place.

Our unnecessary product is better than your unnecessary product

Flavored, vitamin-enhanced waters are all the rage, in spite of the fact that it's pretty easy to argue they have no compelling reason to exist. You may not want to hint at this, even as a part of a knock on your competition.



So, Vitamin Water has 125 calories and Propel only has 25. Advantage Propel, I suppose. But guess what has zero calories? Normal water, which can frequently be obtained without even having to pay for it! I know, I know - shocking. And if you have to do 500 sit-ups to burn off a bottle of Vitamin Water, you're still stuck doing 100 sit-ups to burn off Propel. Burning off actual water? Zero sit-ups!

Of course, actual water doesn't have vitamins - not that you couldn't take a supplement which would also add no calories to your diet - nor does it have a kind of gross, artificial fruit flavor to it like Propel does. So there's that, I guess. But this ad just plays like a luxury car ad where some $40,000 model talks about how their $50,000 competitor is too expensive. "Propel: When you want unnecessary calories, but just not too many."

Hi, I think this commercial sucks

I have always hated the Mac vs. PC ads. The primary reason is that I find them unforgivably smug, but I'm also a PC user who hasn't been a fan of the Mac interface historically, so I've resisted criticizing them because I thought I might just come off as "kinda bitter PC-using guy." But at the risk of doing that, this ad is fucking retarded.



I'm okay - in an "annoyed by the ads, but at least seeing their effectiveness in conveying their message" kind of way - with a lot of the ads in this series. But this one just sucks. I don't care if Mac wants to make ads about "oh, peripherals are easier to use on a Mac" or "Macs don't get spyware and viruses" - they're still smug as all get-out, but at least they can be smug with some justification.

This ad, though? Not so much. I suppose it was just bad luck that Apple went with the Claymation gimmick right at the same time as Alltel - whose ads, frankly, look a lot better as Rankin/Bass parodies than does this one - so I won't give them any grief about being unoriginal (although parody, by its nature, is kind of unoriginal). My issue with this ad is that it's barely even an ad. Does it tell us anything about the Mac? No. Does it tell us why Macs are better than PCs? No. All it does is say, "Look what a dork PC is! Huh? Huh?" It's not a commercial for a Mac, it's a 30-second excuse for Mac owners to feel smug and cool. It's preaching to the converted. Basically, it's a total waste of money. Do you know what Mac's market share is? Less than 7%. Wow! Granted, that number has been growing in recent years... but it's grown all the way to 7%. Windows machines, meanwhile, are well over 90%. I think it's a little early for Apple to drop the "here's why Macs are better" campaign in exchange for a "PCs suck, haw haw" campaign, given that the latter is directed almost exclusively at people who are already Mac users and there just aren't that many of them.

I'm convinced that the only people who like ads like this are the people who already use the product and dislike the competition that's being mocked, so why do companies think ads like this are going to work? At least when Pepsi does it I can think, "Well, it's not like they have much to say about how much better their product is given that it tastes almost exactly the same." If the differences between Macs and PCs are enormous, maybe you want to highlight that. What happens when you make fun of PCs - and, by extension, their users - for being stupid and uncool is not that everyone using a PC goes, "Oh man! What was I thinking?" What happens is a lot of them get turned off by your message and resolve not to use Macs even when you point out the differences.

Mac market share has ticked up a little since this ad campaign started, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say that has more to do with general Mac awareness and the fact that Apple makes other popular products (like the iPod) that get people into the Apple store and generally more into the brand. I really don't think anyone is seeing this ad and thinking, "Man, that guy representing the entire range of PCs is less cool than that Mac dude. Why am I not using a Mac right this very second?" Fucking say something about why your product is better. You know, like you do in your other ads, the ones that don't suck quite as much.

O Come All Ye Faithful, Come and Buy a Hyundai

Hyundai's "Duh" ads, you may recall from this very site some months ago, suck. They're supremely annoying, curiously vague, and obnoxiously smug. But at least they didn't used to look like this:



Here is how the conversation went when this ad first came on:

Knitwear M. Groundhog: At least they picked secular songs. Oh wait, here comes a lamb. Where's God?
Windier E. Megatons: Maybe God's the car.

I mean, way to go, Hyundai. Take the worst of your own ads - the stupid faux-scat-singing, the awful smugness of your announcer - and then combine that with the worst of Mazda's ads! The choir, the positioning of the car as a religious icon being worshipped... seriously, nice job. Utterly savvy marketing sense. As usual, nothing says Christmas like crass commercialism.

Of course, you'll note that Hyundai pointedly uses only secular songs - other ads I've seen in this series have used "O Tannenbaum" and "Carol of the Bells," neither of which is overtly religious in the way that, say, the otherwise mainstream "Joy to the World" is. "Winter Wonderland" is particularly secular in that it doesn't even mention Christmas by name (nor does the ad itself), and for that matter it's not even set in a specific month; the lyrical happenings could well be taking place in February (ironically, that link calls it a Christmas song several times despite the fact that it's nowhere in the lyrics).

The question becomes this: is it more sacrilegious or less sacrilegious if you use a totally secular Christmas song and then put a traditional representation of Jesus - the lamb - into the middle of your ad? I think it's pretty bad either way. There are only two explanations here. One is that Hyundai didn't know that the lamb is a common representation of Jesus (unlikely); the other is that they actively wanted that association. If they wanted it, are they really trying to suggest that Jesus would want you to buy a Hyundai? Even in the Mazda tradition, that seems awfully blasphemous. So let's give Hyundai the benefit of the doubt; maybe we should be seeing the lamb being brought forward as part of a presentation scene. Perhaps the car is for the lamb - i.e., Jesus.

[Setting: Nazareth, 16 AD]
Balthasar: Happy birthday, Jesus.
Jesus: Oh man, a car! This rules! Thanks, Balthasar, you're the greatest!
Melchior: Hey, uh, Balthasar, can we talk to you for a minute?
Balthasar: What's up, guys?
Caspar: I thought we went over this, dude. You were supposed to get him myrrh, just like I got the frankincense, and Melchior got the gold... same thing we do every year.
Balthasar: Okay, you know what, you guys got the useful gifts. Myrrh? Fucking myrrh? That's like the shittiest gift ever. "Here you go, Jesus, something that's only useful if you want to work in a funeral home." And you guys won't ever let me give him the gold once and say it's from me. So yeah, I saved up and got him a car. He's 16, he's got his license now, whatever!
Melchior: Just... you know, we're gonna seem like cheapskates now.
Caspar: Whatever, man, you get him gold every year! How do you think I feel?
Melchior: You see, Balthasar? Now Caspar's crying. I hope you're feeling really good about yourself.

I hope Hyundai is feeling really good about themselves as well. It's bad enough you're going to insult the intelligence of the viewer - now you're trying to imply that Jesus himself approves of your cars? Next time maybe stick with that first secular impulse and display your Motor Trend award like Mazda did. Oh, I guess you didn't win one. Duh.

What the hell are you selling?

You may have seen the HP commercials where they show some famous person's hands displaying the features of their laptops. They've used Serena Williams, Vera Wang, Jay-Z and others in the past, and their newest iteration features comedian Jerry Seinfeld. For those of you familiar with his stand up routines and eponymously named television show, you probably remember Seinfeld as being funny -- hilarious, even. Prepare to be surprised:



Seinfeld: Well If I'm going to do one of those HP computer hand commercial things, I gotta be impressive.

Very "meta" here right at the beginning -- referencing the ad campaign you're currently extending. I guess that's one way to go. Perhaps rather than attempting to be "impressive," Seinfeld should have tried to be "funny."

Seinfeld: Here's my newly-designed basketball stadium. Wait, that's not me.

This is the "funny" part. Don't get it? Why, didn't you see and somehow remember every detail in this other HP commercial a few years ago? Now do you understand the hilarity? If you didn't guffaw the first time you heard his joke, I urge you to write a note of apology and send it to Mr. Seinfeld.

Seinfeld: I did a TV show about New York, and now I've made a movie that takes place in New York, except in this, I'm a bee!

Man, can't a guy just watch a 1-minute commercial for a computer company without a million interruptions? Not only do we get a plug for the '90's hit sit-com "Seinfeld," but we also get one for the long-hyped, heroically-publicized "Bee Movie."

Incidentally, "Bee Movie" currently has a 51% positive review rating on Rotten Tomatoes. That = not good.

Seinfeld: Hang on, message from the wife - oh, it's a manuscript for her new cookbook that gets kids eatin' better without them knowing it. There's carrots in there, ya know.

Another non-HP product: Jessica Seinfeld's book, "Deceptively Delicious." Now, this one I'm pretty sure they don't want to be associated with. Turns out the publisher of Seinfeld's book turned down the manuscript for a nearly-identical cookbook called "The Sneaky Chef" half a year before "Deceptively Delicious" came out.

In defending his wife against claims of plagiarism, Seinfeld took the high road -- calling "The Sneaky Chef"'s author a "wacko" and would-be assassin. Comedy gold.

Seinfeld: She's a genius.

Top 5 Smartest Things in History
1. Theory of Relativity
2. "Principia Mathematica"
3. Mapping the Human Genome
4. Baking spinach into brownies, making them incrementally healthier
5. Theory of Natural Selection

Seinfeld: Oh, message from DreamWorks - don't forget, two "Bee Movie" mentions in HP spot.

Another third party mention with the studio name drop. What's worse, plugging your movie in a commercial for an unrelated product, or calling attention to the fact that you mandated that very same plug?

For the record, it's actually three mentions ("Bee Movie" logo appears on-screen at the end.)

Seinfeld: You know what? This is a business lunch.

Oh, don't worry -- we picked up on that. Whatever you're doing, Seinfeld, it's definitely unrelated to comedy.

Announcer: The HP Pavilion Entertainment notebook with Windows Vista Home Premium.

Final non-HP product tally in this HP commercial: "Bee Movie," "Deceptively Delicious," DreamWorks, "Bee Movie" again, Windows, Vista, "Bee Movie" a-fucking-gain.

7 other product mentions in your commercial. And what was it, exactly, that you wanted me to buy, HP?

One small step for Mazda, one giant leap for... well, Mazda

Seriously, Mazda, get a grip. So you won an award -- congratulations. Now have you ever heard the expression "act like you've been there before"?

Apparently not...



(Motor Trend trophy used as tuning fork)

Man: Come shine here with me

"Shine"? What does that mean in this context?

Chorus: Gotta make, gotta make it mine today

Woman: I'm finally free

You do realize this is a car you're singing about, and not the Bill of Rights?

Chorus: Gonna make, gonna make them stop and say... zoom, zoom, zoom! Yeah, zoom zoom zoom!

Shine on, man. You're free. Zoom zoom! This is nonsensical blather. How many seconds did this take somebody to write? And look at this scene: you have a gospel choir praising and clapping their hands around an SUV - is it some kind of weird cult? Are they about to sacrifice the car? It's eerily fake-looking and hopelessly overwrought.

Announcer: Designed, engineered and now celebrated... the "zoom zoom" way.

Yeah, the "zoom zoom" way. I'm guessing that means there's going to be a party at this guy's house?


I know Mazda's been doing this "zoom zoom" campaign for a while now. I think it makes more sense with the upbeat song and the little kid who says "zoom zoom." Call me crazy, but an 8-year old boy saying "zoom zoom" is more appropriate that a choir of adults doing the same. Recently, Mazda has taken this "zoom zoom" idea and let their imaginations run amok. Take, for example, this fetid, masturbatory "brand essence" video they put together:

(and please, for your sake, don't watch more than 30 seconds of this)



one day you're born.... the next big milestone.....

Crawling? Walking? First word?

you discover go zoom zoom

Get.... over.... yourselves. For fuck's sake, Mazda, the world does not revolve around your mid-level automobiles! This solipsism is inexcusable, even for a brand essence video that probably was never meant to be seen by the consumer.

Also the grammar in that above sentence is indescribably loathsome. Mazda, I think I hate you.

you grow up... acquire responsibilities.... (adults don't go zoom zoom).... but a lucky few never lost the spark.... you, perhaps?... guess what.... there's a car company... they love zoom zoom too

Yes, they do. They love zoom zoom a whole helluva lot. They love it like "pour millions and millions into using this moronic phrase in every piece of collateral we shit out for the next ten years" a lot.

The video continues in this fashion: cheesy, childish phrase, cornball lifestyle stock footage; another embarrassing line of copy, another painful slo-mo shot. I think it's funny that companies bother to define their advertising approach with these "setting-the-tone" presentations. It makes you realize that a large group of people actually put thought behind this. People with decades of experience, people with MBAs, people with art school training -- they all got together in a room and asked the question, "What does 'zoom zoom' really mean?" Then they talked about it as though it were a worthwhile discussion -- as though it would lead to some new way of selling more cars. As though the notion of a close-reading of "go zoom zoom" weren't just utterly absurd.

Mazda -- please go back to making boring, templated car commercials that talk about 0% APR and all-wheel-drive, or whatever. I know I said those kind of ads suck, but, dude, now that I've seen the alternative? Please just stop.

Suspension of disbelief required

Commercials don't always have to show situations exactly how they would play out in reality. Some advertisers, however, take this license too far. They appear to live in an alternate reality where the little bothers of daily life simply don't exist:



Anyone ever been to a bar? Ever ordered a drink? Ever been a regular male human trying to order a drink? You don't just make eye contact with the bartender from 50 feet away in a packed bar and use gestures to get yourself another beer. You saddle up next to the counter and you scream for about 5 minutes until you finally get his attention. Oh, yeah, and then you have to do this thing called paying. I guess maybe this dude has a tab open, but that bartender has somehow remembered his name among all those other people's?

Also, since when did popular bars become baseball stadium stands? This guy didn't order a dog and a Malt Cup at a Mets game, he got a Heineken at some semi-chic watering hole.

Tagline: It's all about the beer.

It's not the most pretentious ad I've seen, but it's pretty obnoxious. I guess Heineken people live in a special, rarefied world where everyone at any given bar conspires to facilitate your import beer drinking (except the guy who steals it, of course). This ad thinks its pretty clever, pretty hip. But the joke is played, and poorly thought-out. Also? You guys are hardly the first to use that "Tempted" song in an ad.